3 ms·

Authenticity and accuracy are distinct concepts. Authenticity refers to artistic sensibility. It has nothing to do with scientifically correct rendering.

crazygringo 2y ago
Can you elaborate? What would it mean, then for one art technology to be more "authentic" than another? How could you ever say that film images were more authentic than digital images? Would you say watercolors are more authentic than oil, or vice-versa? I can understand how one filmmaker might capture a more "authentic" experience of a topic in their movie than another, via their knowledge and written script and direction. Someone who deeply understands their subject. But I fail to understand how shooting on film vs digital would change that (unless you're aiming for a certain historical look).
- Workaccount2 2y ago
  It basically comes down to an old vs. new divide, that is subjectively split at some point in the past. Authentic referring to "the old way" or "the way it used to be done". Used in this context, it's a word that has a fuzzy definition but enough common overlap between everyone's definition that it still works to convey an idea. Its more of a common parlance definition than a strict dictionary one.
  - crazygringo 2y ago
    Is it though? That's certainly not how I've ever understood "authentic". Authentic generally means "not fake" -- not a replica, or else experiencing period art using period implements. E.g. playing retro video games on CRT's is more authentic to what the gaming was actually like in the 80's. Or playing Bach on period instruments is more authentic to how he would have heard his music performed. Or making sure you have period-appropriate architecture and props and clothing in a period show. But the idea that old is inherently more authentic than new is a bizarre idea to me. I would disagree vehemently with that notion -- it seems a kind of harmful prejudice against the present, in favor of the "good old days". Is that really what people think authenticity is? Just... being old? It seems totally wrong to me, but I'm open to hearing if that really is commonly understood meaning.
    - etrautmann 2y ago
      The key idea here is that authenticity has to be relative to a reference. It’s not clear what that reference is for new photos taken today, unless you mean that the experience or photos are more authentic to a previous era.
- chongli 2y ago
  I think authenticity is usually connected to traditional techniques as well as a sense of originality. A clear example of the latter is the original Mona Lisa [1] and the Prado Mona Lisa [2]. While I think most people on the street would argue that the Prado is more beautiful than the original due to its better colour rendition, it is definitely not more authentic since it is a copy (and has undergone a much more dramatic restoration). I wouldn't say watercolours are more or less authentic than oil paintings, but the two physical media are definitely more authentic than digital painting software which attempts to simulate watercolours and oil paints. One is a simulation, the other is the real thing. There's also a more intangible aspect to authenticity, often termed authenticity of experience. For film photography, in the context of the article's report on growing film sales, the subject of the experience is the photographer's. Making a photograph with a film camera is a more authentic experience because it is more manual, more hands-on. There are, of course, late-model film cameras with highly sophisticated light meters and fully automatic exposure programs but those aren't what I am referring to. I am talking about older film cameras such as Leicas or Hasselblads or even large format view cameras. The process of making a photograph with one of these tools is very mechanical, very deliberate, and very far from the software-driven "point & shoot" style of smartphone photography. In many ways, this physicality of process is analogous to the authenticity of experience people get from driving a car with a manual transmission. It makes them feel more connected to the process. It gives them a lot more control and freedom, while also giving them a lot of freedom to make mistakes. Although we might think the latter a bug rather than a feature, when it comes to art the process of learning is all about making mistakes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa_(Prado) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa_(Prado)

crazygringo 2y ago

Can you elaborate? What would it mean, then for one art technology to be more "authentic" than another? How could you ever say that film images were more authentic than digital images? Would you say watercolors are more authentic than oil, or vice-versa? I can understand how one filmmaker might capture a more "authentic" experience of a topic in their movie than another, via their knowledge and written script and direction. Someone who deeply understands their subject. But I fail to understand how shooting on film vs digital would change that (unless you're aiming for a certain historical look).

Workaccount2 2y ago
It basically comes down to an old vs. new divide, that is subjectively split at some point in the past. Authentic referring to "the old way" or "the way it used to be done". Used in this context, it's a word that has a fuzzy definition but enough common overlap between everyone's definition that it still works to convey an idea. Its more of a common parlance definition than a strict dictionary one.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  Is it though? That's certainly not how I've ever understood "authentic". Authentic generally means "not fake" -- not a replica, or else experiencing period art using period implements. E.g. playing retro video games on CRT's is more authentic to what the gaming was actually like in the 80's. Or playing Bach on period instruments is more authentic to how he would have heard his music performed. Or making sure you have period-appropriate architecture and props and clothing in a period show. But the idea that old is inherently more authentic than new is a bizarre idea to me. I would disagree vehemently with that notion -- it seems a kind of harmful prejudice against the present, in favor of the "good old days". Is that really what people think authenticity is? Just... being old? It seems totally wrong to me, but I'm open to hearing if that really is commonly understood meaning.
  - etrautmann 2y ago
    The key idea here is that authenticity has to be relative to a reference. It’s not clear what that reference is for new photos taken today, unless you mean that the experience or photos are more authentic to a previous era.
chongli 2y ago
I think authenticity is usually connected to traditional techniques as well as a sense of originality. A clear example of the latter is the original Mona Lisa [1] and the Prado Mona Lisa [2]. While I think most people on the street would argue that the Prado is more beautiful than the original due to its better colour rendition, it is definitely not more authentic since it is a copy (and has undergone a much more dramatic restoration). I wouldn't say watercolours are more or less authentic than oil paintings, but the two physical media are definitely more authentic than digital painting software which attempts to simulate watercolours and oil paints. One is a simulation, the other is the real thing. There's also a more intangible aspect to authenticity, often termed authenticity of experience. For film photography, in the context of the article's report on growing film sales, the subject of the experience is the photographer's. Making a photograph with a film camera is a more authentic experience because it is more manual, more hands-on. There are, of course, late-model film cameras with highly sophisticated light meters and fully automatic exposure programs but those aren't what I am referring to. I am talking about older film cameras such as Leicas or Hasselblads or even large format view cameras. The process of making a photograph with one of these tools is very mechanical, very deliberate, and very far from the software-driven "point & shoot" style of smartphone photography. In many ways, this physicality of process is analogous to the authenticity of experience people get from driving a car with a manual transmission. It makes them feel more connected to the process. It gives them a lot more control and freedom, while also giving them a lot of freedom to make mistakes. Although we might think the latter a bug rather than a feature, when it comes to art the process of learning is all about making mistakes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa_(Prado) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa_(Prado)